From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mika Westerberg Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 5/8] ACPI / hotplug / PCI: Unified notify handler for hotplug events Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 12:30:45 +0300 Message-ID: <20130709093045.GJ4898@intel.com> References: <26431283.HJCKsss0rt@vostro.rjw.lan> <1475924.SZkPqZAdKY@vostro.rjw.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1475924.SZkPqZAdKY@vostro.rjw.lan> Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List , Bjorn Helgaas , LKML , Linux PCI , Yinghai Lu , Jiang Liu List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 02:19:04AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > Index: linux-pm/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp.h > =================================================================== > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp.h > +++ linux-pm/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp.h > @@ -137,6 +137,7 @@ struct acpiphp_context { > acpi_handle handle; > struct acpiphp_func *func; > struct acpiphp_bridge *bridge; > + bool handler_for_func:1; Hmm, should it be just plain: bool handler_for_func; ? What's the reason using bitfields for bool? > };